You're entitled to your perspective, but the institutional issues you raise are present at both ends of the spectrum. The pundits in the media are more interested in getting people to become antagonistic to one another, than in developing intelligent solutions. The media panders to both liberals and conservatives on hot-button issues in order to gain support on issues that largely have very little to do with economics, public policy, or infrastructure. Ending abortion is a galvanizing issue in movement Conservatism, just as ending perceived racism is a galvanizing issue in Liberalism.
Riiight. Show me the progressive news outlet that sued for (and won!) the right to outright lie
to its viewers. Show me the liberal radio and print empires built on the premise that all outsiders are murderous heathens, so send us money. Show me the members of goddamn Congress
on the progressive side who casually drop statements about how certain people don't deserve rights, or victims aren't really victims. Conversely, show me the conservative fact-checkers, who call out bullshit where they see it regardless of what team it's on. Show me the conservative media outlet that pushes policy even remotely connected to established and well-documented reality. Show me the conservative leaders who actively push people to get a wider perspective on key issues, including examining anything but the craziest version of the other side's perspective.
Yes, there is some
crap on both sides, but it's hardly the even distribution you claim.
To many conservatives, it is unimaginable and unthinkable to kill a fetus. This makes some conservatives angry and bigoted in their dealings with those who disagree. To many liberals, it is unimaginable and unthinkable that a woman's choice over the fetus growing inside her would be hampered by society. This makes some liberals angry and bigoted in their dealings with those who disagree.
You can start by defining "bigoted", with the stipulation that I will reject any definition that includes "stating that adult human beings should have human rights". Once you've done that, let's see how big "some" is on each side. You already know how this will look.
We see some conservatives who openly threaten to kill (and have killed) abortionists, just as we see some liberals erupting in violence after the Trayvon Martin ruling.
While I fall in neither the liberal nor conservative category, the point is that all of us - whether liberals or conservatives - are ultimately decent people, who are simply being conditioned to focus on areas of disagreement rather than share the many things we have in common.
The difference: Nobody encouraged the violence around the Martin ruling from on high. In fact, I don't recall a single mention that didn't condemn it. On the other hand, active promotion of violence against LGBT people is a big thing in conservative circles. (Active promotion of violence against doctors who perform abortions has died down somewhat since courts made it clear that that shit won't fly because doctors keep turning up dead.)
It's kinda hard to focus on - or even find - common ground with someone who says you should be killed for the crime of existence, let alone any of the other very popular and very toxic policies in the conservasphere.
EDIT: Also worth noting - in fact, already noted in this thread: The widespread hatred for abortion in at least
the Evangelical community and, I believe, the wider conservative community is about thirty years old - a decade before that, abortion freedom was considered a major victory for religious freedom and to be protected strongly. Why did that change so quickly, do you suppose?